Here is a list of the cases which changed employment law in Canada in 2017 (in no particular order). Note that some of these cases are not yet published on CanLII and therefore, there is no link available.

The Ontario Superior Court recently awarded an employee on leave due to disability, damages representing the salary he would have earned had he been able to work during the working notice period set by his employer.

At almost 100 pages, Galea is a hefty case with many facets not touched upon in the above summary. That said, it marks the latest in a trend of Ontario courts issuing ever higher awards for bad employer conduct in both dismissal and subsequent litigation.

In Buchanan v. Introjunction Ltd., 2017 BCSC 1002, the Court considered a case where the employer terminated the plaintiff’s employment before he commenced work. The Court rejected employer’s argument that the probation period clause applied to limit its liability to provide notice of termination of employment.

In 2017, the provincial legislature and Ontario judges continued to change Ontario’s employment laws. These changes resulted in higher payroll costs and a more regulated workplace. This blog briefly identifies 10 employment law developments from the past year.

Two recent Small Claims Court cases demonstrate the courts’ willingness to sanction employers for improper just cause allegations. These cases highlight the fact that employers need to be cautious in asserting just cause.

Reinstatement is the practice of re-installing an employee to his/her position as it existed prior to termination, or to the fullest extent possible, which may include the preservation of their pre-existing seniority, pension and other benefits.

Some employers erroneously believe that there is a “rule of thumb” in the common law that employees are entitled to a month of notice per year of service. The Ontario Court of Appeal has held that there is no such rule, and that determinations of reasonable notice must be based on an assessment of all relevant factors.

A recent summary judgment motion before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Amberber v. IBM Canada Limited, serves as an important reminder to employers of the need to draft contractual termination clauses with a high degree of clarity, or risk unanticipated liability in the event of a without cause dismissal.

On September 25, 2017, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released its decision Fulmer v. Nordstrong Equipment Limited, 2017 ONSC 5529 (“Nordstrong”), where the Court dealt with a wrongful termination case, and issued a noteworthy determination on an employee’s bonus entitlements.

Bonus entitlement is always a juicy topic. In September the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released a decision that shed some light on the issue of how entitlement to a bonus will be treated where an employer has no formal bonus policy, but a consistent past practice.

A well-drafted employment contract is the best employment law investment an employer can make. It can enhance or expand management’s rights, and it can save the employer thousands of dollars in termination costs.

The three popular articles this week on HRinfodesk deal with: a recent policy statement released by the Ontario Human Rights Commission, a proposed increase to administrative monetary penalties under Bill 148 and consequential and technical changes to regulations made under the Employment Standards Act if the proposed Bill 148, Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017 is passed.